14-9000

104-10333-10008, [2025 RELEASE UNDER THE PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY ASSASSINATION RECORDS ACT OF 1992 |
a a fee (0 33i~ /
SF AC

at
s

a UNCLASSIFIED

NOTE FOR: J. Barry Harrelson @ DA
Gloria M. Boyd,@ DA

Barbara A. Standley @ DA
FROM: John F. Pereira
DATE: 12/07/94 05:00:07 PM
SUBJECT: Meeting with JFK Board Staff

I've confirmed with David Marwell that we will meet with him and several of his staff in Ames at 10:00, tuesday, 20 December.

For D/CSI: Marwell asked us to provide background on our JFK review process to him and the four or five members of his staff who will
be on hoard. Among them will be Sheryl Walter, their General Counsel. I've invited Bob Eatinger, OGC to participate.

cc: Brian S. Latell @ DA

UNCLASSIFIED

1.

2.

3.

4.

— a/qy
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

(draft)

BRIEFING OUTLINE (For JFK Board)

Background on CIA's approach to review of JFK records

Organization of the effort

The review process

Description of records under review

Condition of records
Sequestered documents
Oswald 201 file
Microfilm (printouts)
Other records
- HSCA
- SSCI
- HPSCI
- FBI, other third agency
- Warren Commission, Rockefeller Commission

- Presidential libraries -Ford, Kennedy, Johnson

Status report on processing of documents

Records released to NARA (in full, sanitized)
Records remaining to be completed
Records withheld (examples)

Types of information sanitized

Issues/Problems

Degree of sanitization

Relevancy


Privacy

Duplicates

Office of Personnel files
Office of Security files

Identification aids (examples)

Indexing

Jim Lesar litigation

Inadvertent release of agent's identity

Review of records by the Board

Summaries

(examples- financial records)

CIA JFK Collections

1) Oswald 201 file: 17 boxes (Aug 93/Jan 94 Release)
1) JFK hard copy, 63 boxes (Aug 93/Feb 94 Release)

2) JFK microfilm, 72 reels (currently under review)

The Microfilm Reels contain the files that the HSCA staff
either requested or had access to. A great deal of the
material is duplicative of that found in the 63 hard copy
boxes including the complete Oswald 201 file. There are
also files not related to the assassination story and files
not reviewed by the HSCA.

HGR has reviewed all the microfilm material (page by page)
with the exception of the Oswald 201 file. The Microfilm
collection has been divided into to two parts:

1} documents reviewed for release and being prepare
for NARA (records related to the assassination, the
investigations, or the various conspiracy theories),

2) documents reviewed but being held pending
discussion with the board (see attachment).

4go000

Microfilm Material Not Processed for Release (Pending
Discussion with the Board):.

Oswald 201 File - this appears to be a duplicate of the hard
copy 201 file reviewed in 1993. 124 Reels/approximately
30,600 pages

CIA Staff Employees' Personnel Files - Approximately 10,800

pages located on 7 different reels. Request that these file
not be considered part of the JFK collection as a matter of
privacy. Only a small portions of these files have any
relevance to the JFK investigations and we believe that the
documents related to their roles in the JFK story were
released in the JFK hard copy collection. We have reviewed
each of the OP files and prepared a classified summary for
the Board.

Non-Related Material - Most of these documents fall into
three major categories:

Individual 201 files : These files cover the entire
period of agency interest or contact with a person. For
individuals who are not "key figures" in the JFK story,
those sections of the file that are outside relevant time
frames or can not be linked to Oswald, the assassination,
the various investigations, or any of the conspiracy
theories have been treated as non-related.

Project/Operational Files: Many of these cover the
complete life of a project. Sections of these file deals
with operations which have no connection with the
assassination or fall in only part of a relevant time frame.
For example there are over 3000 pages on the Mexico City
Photo operation covering the 1960's and 1970's. The only
related material is that falling in the time frame of
Oswald's visit to Mexico City and the investigation
following the assassination.

Cuban Exile Groups/Operations: The anti-Castro
activities of the Cuban exiles in the us Guring 1960 - 1963
are considered relevant to the assassination. However, some
of the organizations and individuals members continued to
run operations against Castro into the 1970's. The exile
activities after the assassination are generally not
considered related unless they involve plots to assassinate
Castro, the continuation of pre-assassination projects or
the Garrison Investigation.

14-0000

Notes:

I did not address the financial records of the CRC that we
are replacing with a summary (need to review again); we will
probably have to wait until we meet with the full board to
get their thinking on summaries.

There are other categories/types of documents that are non-
‘related but do not fit in the above categories. For
example, the HSCA requested files on 29 on defectors; they
chose only 11 for their defector sample to be compared with
Oswald. We treated the 11 as related and the rest as non-
related. However, the number of pages involved is small
compared to the above three categories.

14-0000

, — Manny

to: John Pereira C
fax #: 703-243-8343 IA HAS NO OBJECTION TO

: U ng Vis DECLASSIFICATION AND/OR
re: peonung Visit RELEASE OF CIA INFORMATION
date: December 19, 1994 IN THIS DOCUMENT
pages: 1, including cover shect.

The followng ARRB Staff will be coming:

David G. Marwell

Gene Burpoe (Starting 27, December)
Jeremy Gunn (Interim TS)

Sheryl Walter (Interim TS)

Tom Samoluk (Clearance Pending)

From the desk of .,
David G. Marwell! % i,
—. Executwe Director
Aguassinasion Recoras Revew Board

300 C'Sreei NW * Room 203
Wasturgton, OT 20004

(202) 724-0088 -
Fax. (202) 714-0457

14-0000

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

20 Dec 94

BRIEFING OUTLINE (For JFK Board Staff)

INTRODUCTIONS
AGENDA: Discuss review process for JFK records
Status of document review
Discuss indexing (Gloria)
Walk-through/see documents
1. Overview of CIA's approach to review of JFK records
a. Process of review began in April 1992
b. How the original "core' file was organized
- Sequestered file
- Oswald 201
c. How CIA identified additional records
- Oswald 201 file
- Search request in_1993
2. Organization of the effort
- Staffing
- Steps in the review process:
-- Reviewers
-- Senior reviewers provided guidance
-- Coordinated with directorates
-- Coordinated with third agencies
- Guidance (JFK Law, specific)
3. Description of records under review
- Condition of records
-- poor quality
-- not organized

-- lots of duplicates _
-- large number of press items

- Sequestered documents (64 boxes, 127,000 pages)

- Oswald 201 file (17 boxes, 35,000 pages)

14-0000

- Gates released a pre-assassination file
on Oswald to Congress in 1992

- Microfilm (1 of 64 boxes, 72 reels, 164,000 pages)
(printouts) ,

- Other records

- DCI Morning meeting minutes (400 pages)

-_ HSCA - 14,000 pp retOmnre\s [fi,oce \e Ao\

- SSCI = Crnple

- upscr/- oN

- FBI, other third agency ~-40--0G0=pp-

- Warren Commission, Rockefeller Commission

- Presidential libraries -Ford, Kennedy, Johnson
- Ford Library documents reviewed -

4. Status report on processing of documents

- Records released to NARA (in full, sanitized)
(attachment)

- Records remaining to be completed
“ “ -

\5 ooo | HSCA, Working files, Presidential libraries

- Records withheld (examples)
- + Types of information sanitized
-- identity of agents
-- sensitive sources and methods
-- relations with foreign government
-- unwarranted invasion of privacy
- Summaries (examples--financial records)
5. Issues/Problems (examples of postponed information)
- Degree of sanitization

- Relevancy e.g., chrono cables from Mexico City
(Chinese ops items)

- Privacy

- Duplicates (Oswald 201 in microfilm)

14-0000

- Office of Personnel files
Office of Security files

- Hand- written notes prepared by HSCA staffers
-- 5x8 cards, note pads, sensitive operational
information, some of it innaccurate

- Identification aids (examples)
Indexing

- Jim Lesar litigation--receives copies of docs, i.a.

'- Inadvertent release of agent's identity
(attachment)

6. Discuss arrangements for review of records by the Staff

14-0000

CIA SPECIAL CUOLLEC HUNS
RELEASE IN FULL
2000

Assassination Review Board

Second Public Meeting, 12 July 1994
Room 105, NARA

Official Attendees: Members of the Board, Steve Tilly, NARA.

Public: 25/30 in attendance including four from FBI (Terry
& Grant), Lesar, and Newman. Also one network
(ABC?) rep.

Purpose: Transact official business, briefing form Tilly on
recent releases; discuss future board activities

Selected items of HRG Interest:

I spoke with Jack after the meeting. Ex. Director MARWELL
will be on board 8 Augusts; they expect to be in new offices
by 15 August and have a core staff in September. Jack said
(after meeting) he would like to meet us last part of
August/early September.

Tilly said that the CIA would be releaseing 70,000 pages
later this summer (he ask me before the meeting if July was
still a good date -- I said "no"). He also mentioned the
20,000 pages of HSCA material in our files that we would be
reviewing this summer.

4

FBI received praise from the board; not much discussion of
CIA. DOD agencies are now the "bad boys". Hall ask several
pointed questions about the "small" DOD releases then Newman
blasted NSA and DIA during the question period.

.Items/Issues addressed by the Board during the meeting:

Announced appointment of Executive Director David G. MARWELL
(see bio sheet). Will be on board 8 August.

Passed resolution extending the Board to October 1995
MOA signed with the White House - funds through Sept. 1994
Discussed status of items before Congress (extending the

Board to October 1996 and funding). Funds included in House
version of appropriation bill/deleted from Senate. They

-assume that the -funds will-be restored in Conference;

however, could be reduced which would impact on number of
public meeting to held outside of Washington.

Expects to move into new office space by mid-August and have
a core staff in place in September. The bulk of the staff
would come on board in October.

14-0000

Plans to begin public hearing on defining an assassination
record in Sept. Anna Nelson commented on the importance of
identifying what is a record before beginning to address
specific issues/documents.

William Joyce reported that he had sent letters to 55
agencies asking about the quaintly of records still heid by
the agency and had received 20 responses several which had
identified additional sources for documents (no specifics)

Steve Tilley gave a briefing on status of releases.

Releases since last meeting include tapes of telephone calls
from the Johnson Library, the FBI files, Church Committee (7
boxes), and DOJ's FOIA litigation files. This month an
additional 10 boxes of Church Committee and some Pike
Committee Files (only a small part deals with JFK). Expects
a release from the CIA of approximately 70,000 pages later
this summer (mentioned the 73 Reels).

Tilley also described the 20,000 pages of HSCA material in
CIA files and that NARA would be acting as House agent on
these record.

Questions (to Tilly) by the Board:

Size of the NARA collection? - 1200 Cubic Feet (2500 pages
per foot)

(Jack) what was the number of documents with redactions? --
Steve said he could not give a figure, would guess less than
50%

(Graff) any problems with agencies' willingness to release
documents -- None, considers the work be the various
agencies as a remarkable effort to turn over records. The
problem was the volume of material and the time it takes to
review. ;

A question about Senate and House Committee reviews
procedures led to a discussion where it was clear that
neither the Board nor Tilly had a good fix on that part of
the review. The point was made that CIA information in
those documents (and in our HSCA material) would be reviewed
by CIA reviewers; the originator of the information was the
key reviewer) .

(Jack) how were the agencies doing in defining
"assassination records? -- Tilly described some of his
discussions about assassination records within NARA and with
other agencies. He mentioned that the "major agencies" had
records that they felt fell outside the scope which they
planned to discuss with the board.

14-0000

(Hall) how was the cooperation of the DOD intelligence
agencies including NSA / how much had they withheld ? --
Tilly said he found them cooperative but that the release
was small. Did not know off hand how much was withheld.
Hall considered so few record as "suspect" and ask if NARA
had followed up. Tilly said no. NARA did not have the
authority to question the agencies about their searches. He
indicated that the Army among others had not responded to
NARA's initial request. (During the public comments part of
the meeting Newman and Lesar returned to the question of DOD
compliance.)

Several members of the Board had questions about the
Presidential Libraries; Tilly described his role and the
process. ,

When Jack open the meeting for public comments, Newman
returned to the question about DOD releases. He clamied
that NSA had release only one true document and that most of
the DIA files was administrative or news clipping. He said
he had seen at least 30 DOD documents in CIA and FBI files
that did not appear in the DIA release.

Newman then ask if the agencies could withhold documents
from the Board; Jack responded that under the law thar only
Board had the power to withold a document.

Lesar ask if the Board had given consideration to.his letter
concerning the definition of an assassination record. Jack
thanked him for the letters but the Board would not be able
to address the issues Lesar raised until they had a staff to
do the research.

A third "expert" named Mark Zaid ask a question about Post
Office files that had been released before and how they
compared with recent Post Office files found by NARA. Anna
responded that such questions require a staff.

14-0000

SUR LS D4 Le r.Us

Saclay
ASSASSINATION RECORDS REVIEW BOARD
600 E Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20004
MEMORANDUM
via facsimile: } pages
TO: JOHN PEREIRA CIA HAS NO OBJECTION TO DATE: September 23, 1994
DECLASSIFICATION AND/OR
RELEASE OF CIA INFORMATION
IN THIS DOCUMENT
FR: JOHN R. TUNHEIM PHONE: (612) 296-2351
Chair
RE: PEREIRA LETTERS

Please disregard the letter faxed to you on the issues the Review Board would like to
review on Wednesday, as that was a preliminary draft of the issues. On Monday you will
be faxed a letter which will be in final form of the issues the Reivew Board would like to
discuss. I apologize for any confusion this may have caused. Thank you.

ADDRESS FOR REVIEW BOARD CHAIR
102 State Capitol » St. Paul, Minnesota 55153-1002
612 296-2351 - TDD 612-297-7206 + Fay 612-297-4193

14-0000

SEP 25 "YA Ld: oo FLUL

ASSASSINATION RECORDS REVIEW BOARD
600 IX STREET N.W.
WASHINGTON, DC 20004
202-724-0088 » Fax 202-724-0457

September 23, 1994
via facsimile: 703/243-8343

CIA HAS NO OBJECTION TO
. ___ DECLASSIFICATION AND/OR
John Pereira RELEASE OF CIA INFORMATION
Chief, Historical Review Group IN THIS DOCUMENT

Room 404 Ames Building
Central Intelligence Agency
Washington, D.C. 20505

Dear Mr. Pereira:

This is to confirm our discussion in which we agreed to meet on Wednesday,
September 28, 1994 at 10:00 a.m. in your offices to discuss the agency’s review of
records related to the assassination of President Kennedy. I expect all of the Board
members, Kermit Hall, Henry Graff, Anna Nelson, and William Joyce to join me, as well
as the Board’s Executive Director, David Marwell. As | indicated, Mr. Matwell now has
a “temporary top secret” security classification. I expect to fax to you on Monday a list
of the questions that the Board would like to review with you and your staff, questions _
along the lines we discussed on Wednesday.

We look forward to meeting with you and beginning our understanding of the issues
and the process that the CIA is following with respect to the records that fall within the
Review Board’s jurisdiction. Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

—
John R. Tunheim
Chair

cc: Board Members
David Marwell

ADDRESS FOR REVIEW BOARD CHAIR
102 Stau: Capiwl - St Paul, MN 535155
612-296-2351 + TDD 612-297-7206 » Fax 612-297-4193

14-0000

@

ASSASSINATION RECORDS REVIEW BOARD
; 600 E STREET N.W. CIA HAS NO CONE STION To

202-724-0088 - Fax 202-724-0457 INTHIS Doe iN FORMATION

September 26, 1994
via facsunile: 703/243-8343

John Pereira

Chief, Historical Review Group
Room 404 Ames Building
Central Intelligence Ageacy
Washington, D.C. 20505

Dear Mr. Pereira:

In our briefing meeting on Wednesday, the Review Board would like to address the
following issues, along with whatever issues you may wish to raise.

1. Overview of the JFK Assassination Record review process tollowed by
the CIA, including:

a. Formation of the original core file that was organized in ... _. _.
response to previous congressional investigations; 7

b. The process by which the CIA identified additional
assassination records in order to fulfill the mandate of the
current legislation.

2. Overview of the process by which the CIA has identified assassination
records, including relevant discussion of the filing system;

3. Discussion of the files which include assassination records, including:

a. Bnefing on the filing system(s), content of C1A archives,
effect of reorganization of CIA since 1960s on filing
‘ systems, etc.

-- +--+ 4, ~The CIA’s view as to how. the term-"assassination records" should be-
defined:

ADDRESS FOR REVIEW BOARD CHAIR
102 State Captiol - Su Paul, MN 55155
612-290-2351] - TDD 612-297-7206 + Fax 612-297-4193

14-0000

4 .
-* John Pereira
Page Two
September 26, 1994

5. Discussion of postponement issues from the CIA’s view, including
reviewing examples of postponed information and categories of
postponed information;

6. Discussion about relevant files at the Ford Library;
7. Review issue of operational files as it relates to assassination records.

We look forward to seeing you on Wednesday. Please contact me or Dave Marwell
if there is any matter that we should discuss prior to Wednesday. We are planning a 4-5
hour meeting. Thanks very much.

, Sincerely,

di a SJuhe~

John R, Tunheim
Chair
cc: Board Members
David Marwell

14.90000

ay

UA SPELIAL COLLECTIONS
RELEASE IN FULL TS anny
2000
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

28 Sep 94
BRIEFING OUTLINE (For JFK Board)

INTRODUCTION: Discuss review process for JFK records
Walk-through look at documents
Possible demonstration of indexing (Gloria)
1. Overview of CIA's approach to review of JFK records
a. How the original "core' file was organized
b. How CIA identified additional records
- Oswald 201 file
- Search request in 1993
2. Overview of CIA filing system(which include JFK records)
_ Issue of operational files
3a Organization of the effort
- Staff (from attached data sheet)
- Steps in the review process:

-- Reviewers

-- Senior reviewers provided guidance

-- Coordinated with directorates

-- Coordinated with third agencies
3h Description of records under review

- Condition of records

-- poor quality

-~- not organized

-- lots of duplicates

-- large number of press items.

_- Sequestered documents (64, boxes, 127,000 pagesite WAKA0 WA
- Oswald 201 file (17 boxes, 35,000 pages)

- Gates released a pre-assassination file
on Oswald to Congress ‘in 1992

- Microfilm (1 of 64 boxes, 72 reels, 164,000 pages)
A

14-0000

(printouts)
- Other records

- DCI Morning meeting minutes (400 pages)

- HSCA - 20,000 pp. NO.

- SSCT

- HPSCI

- FBI, other third agency - 10,000 pp

- Warren Commission, Rockefeller Commission

- Presidential libraries -Ford, Kennedy, Johnson
4. How assassination record should be defined ?
5. Status report on processing of documents

Records released to NARA (in full, sanitized)
(attachment)

Records remaining to be completed

HSCA, Working files, Presidential libraries

Records withheld (examples)

- Types of information sanitized
-- identity of agents
-- sensitive sources and methods
-- relations with foreign government
-- unwarranted invasion of privacy
- Summaries (examples--financial records)
6. Issues/Problems (examples of postponed information)

- Degree of sanitization

- Relevancy e.g., chrono cables from Mexico City
(Chinese ops items)

- Privacy
- Duplicates (Oswald 201 in microfilm)

- Office of Personnel files
Office of Security files

14.90000

ay,

7.

8.

- Hand- written notes prepared by HSCA staffers
-- 5x8 cards, note pads, sensitive operational
information, some of it innaccurate

- Identification aids (examples)
Indexing

- Jim Lesar litigation--receives copies of docs, i.a.

- Inadvertent release of agent's identity
(attachment)

Ford Library--relevant files.

Question: Arrangements for review of records by the

Board ?

14.90000

iF

SECRET

The following Agency members will attend the meeting ©
with the ARRB on Wednesday, 2 August 1995:

Eleanor Neiman
Directorate of Operations

{Michael Luce 7/
Directorate of Operations

(John Kambourian?
Directorate of Operations

Fred Wickhan
Directorate of Operations

William McNair
Directorate of Operations

Robert Eatinger
Office of General Counsel

Barry Harrelson
Historical Review Group

SECRET

14.90000

SECRET

[+ a ay 7s

The following Agency members will attend the meeting
with the ARRB on Thursday, 18 May 1995:

Eleanor Neiman
Senior Coordinator, Directorate of Operations

Margaret Sanders Che)

Latin America Division, Directorate of Operations

Robert Eatinger
Office of General Counsel

William McNair
Information Review Officer, Directorate of Operations

Michael Luce /

Latin America Division, Directorate of Operations

John Pereira
Historical Review Group

Barry Harrelson
Historical Review Group

SECRET

14.90000

a
lc Marek 94

1. Mr. Devine will discuss the perspective of the
Directorate of Operations with respect to sensitive
information that may appear in the assassination records.
This includes information related to protection of sources
and liaison relationships.

2. The following Agency members will attend the
meeting with the ARRB on Monday, 6 March 1995:

John Devine
Associate Deputy Director for Operations

Donald Cryer
Deputy Chief, Information Management Staff

Eleanor Neiman
Senior Coordinator, Directorate of Operations

Margaret Sanders/

Latin America Division, Directorate of Operations

Robert Eatinger
Office of General Counsel

Frederick Wickham
Chief of External Support, Information Management

John Pereira
Historical Review Group

Barry Harrelson
Historical Review Group

14.90000

To Mr. David Marwell:
The following Agency members will attend the meeting with
tthe ARRB on Monday, 6 March 1995:

John Devine

Donald Cryer

Eleanor Neiman

Margaret Sanders

Robert Eatinger
Frederick Wickhan
John Pereira

Barry Harrelson

}14-00000

CERTIFICATION FOR 6 MARCH 1995 SI/TK/G&B

David Marwell 080-30-7709

Thomas J. Gunn 529-74-8907
Thomas E. Samoluk 030-50-1292

Sheryl Walter 506-80-0934

14-0000

SECRET
11 December 1995

NOTE FOR THE FILE

SUBJECT: Briefing of JFK Board Staff: Cover

1. On 1 December, Barry Gibson, Deputy Chief of the
Office of Central Cover, briefed the Executive Director of
the Assassinations Records Review Board and other Board
staff members. Also participating from CIA were (John Goins }
and Eleanor Neiman of IMS; Linda. inda. Cipriani}, OGC; and Barry
Harrelson and I from HRG.

2. The focus of the briefing was on the need to protect
the names of former Agency employees that appeared in the
JFK records. Gibson discussed the risks involved for people
who retired under cover if they were identified in the
public record as former CIA employees. He discussed the
efforts made by his office to obtain written statements from
the more than 100 individuals whose names appear.

3. The purpose of the briefing was to assist the Board
in its review of names when it meets on 12-13 December. The
Agency was asked in particular to present, in writing,
evidence of risk for each of the names that will be

discussed at the Board's meeting.

te [GROEN |

John F. Pereira

CL BY: ee ee
CL REASON: wa Ov 2-F7 fs o.

DECL ON: Gan agr eo
DEV FROM:___- 748 76-7

SECRET

14-00000

ARRB OPEN MEETING
6 August 1996

HANDOUTS

Memorandum of Understanding Between the Director of Central
Intelligence and the Select Committee on Assassinations

Office of Legislative Counsel Memorandum (OLC 79-2477) dtd
August 1979; Subject: HSCA Records

Request of Records Disposition Authority
CIA's HSCA JFK Sequestered Records - I [Boxes 1-63]

CIA's HSCA JFK Sequestered Records - II [Box 64]

14-00000

‘Pa peat Ne Tey AGENCY Cory

‘

a, : . Sfrgminy Attest igen Ba dt |
-3f FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY
| (Sea instruc >s on reverse)

‘0: GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTAATION, Re

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS. SERVICE, WASHINGTON, pe 20508

DATE RECEIVED

1. FROM (AGENCY OR ESTABLISHMENT) . ~ . June 3 1980
——Central_Inte ence Agency NOTIFICATION TO AGENCY
2. MAJOR SUBDIVISION 7 : .
ew as . In accordance with the provisions of 49 US.C. 33033 the disnesatre. | -
Office o ec oO se 08-76 Guest, including amasdmants. ig 2ccroved exceot for items that m

be ASSOLE Copeiee AROMINIES TC Soa
WOT REQUIRED FOR APPROVAL oF
. RERMANEN? RETENTTON OR RECORDS

Dute Archivist of the Cnited States

3. MINOR SUBDIVISION ~

_— ,
4, MAME OF PERSON WITH WHOM TO CONFER .

Elizabeth S. Lancer, Jori E. Wolfe

David Wo Landream —° 6
8. CERTIFICATE OF AGENCY FPRESENTATIVE:

; fn nuthate yd ee MH. wae y 7 bee. Thor a
| hereby certify that | am authorized fo act for this agency in matters ‘pertaining to the disg68al of the agency's records; «+ °°

that the records proposed for disposal jn this Request of 2 page(s) are not now needed for the business of . -

this agency or Will not be needed after tha fetention periods Specified, . . CO ete ae
ria Request for irimediate disposal, co : So

:; B Request for disposal after a specified period of time Or request for permanent -...
”™ ea OE vhs roo ' . . - +
retention, Coa bl ee ian oy . Se
©. DATE _ D. SISYATURE OF AGENCY. RgPyessecare E. TITLE . :
. . = a + Ph . fe ry . . . . . . . "a . . . .
5/23/80 | Fdéar T, McHenyy SE eo Associate Records Management Officer
tee iret nas aoe erate eee =
7 ; Ss . §, DESCAIPTION OF ITEM s. 10.
ITEM HO, |, a Aven inclusive O2tes or Retention Periods) aE eer ACTION TAKEN

¥,

tee
4

ME baby lie! ee. 7
qe PO ERIAL HELD BY. CIA: RELATING TO THE HOUSE SELECT :

» (COMITTER GN Assassrearions INVESTIGATIONS

y “4%
i er od

‘ collect A €ites reviewed by the Comnittee
and is py yr =f TY ©: ;
stored, are ‘inspected in accordance with Federal Standards
for archival microfilm, The microfilming was done in
those instunces when ‘it Was necessary to return the Paper
Files to their original locations: (Zach paper file ~
Microfilmed will ba inaintained or-disposed of in accor-
idarce with roved records control scherhtles covering
the record series of which the file is a part.)

} 4. Silver original Lin microfilm procuced, Stored, and]
‘ . : + a re rn pow , . ‘
; PSpeenea dn devon whi) Ror vot?

i
: ! .
TN tay tanita ett aetee ote les ee ee eee Ft tee ett | eee ce oe steneaee A a neat ee ae we gee —_

ia STANDARO Foa

Pee gas Seg?


1-00000

“A
€

yy Riot ee °

PFoe .
“OR OFFIGIAL USE ONLY
; . ‘{ joB.NO, - | PAGE OF
.¢St for Records Disposition Authority — Continuation . 408 .NO .
= 8. DESCRIPTION OF ITEM- SAMPLE On| 2 10. 2
ITEM NO. (With Inclusive Dates or Retention Perlods) JOB NO. ACTION TAKEN

b.. Textual records not contained in "la" above,

Permanent. Records to be retained in the Agency Archives
and Records Center. Not to be Opened without the
concurrence of the Legislative and General Counsels.

Records will be offered for transfer to the National en ;
Archives and Records. Service when national security too. .
considprations permit, . oo, . .

A

ml. Bigtial inSpection of itéin Ja microfilm will be conducted
a3 required by 41CFR 101.11, 507 -2, at 2 year interval

~ from the approval date of this records disposition request, 7 te
Armonathehite, |e ¢ i ae
‘fen By Wolfe/CtA, and RG Tagge/NARS-NCD, 6/04-05/adt
Men ata Das inaryeg eT ae a

_

oe - Rr ca

: re es - :
-203 . Four caples, Includidg orighrar, tobe suSmitied

STANDARD. FOSM 115-0,

Rimiged Jere fete a

Peaseriomd by (Sasarat Seevices

AGT Ci statGT
a SRE

Se .
to tha National Archives a


14-0000

OLC 79-2477

10 August 1979

7

mihORANDUI FOR: fr. George Frates

AC/xecerds Management Livision -
=F ISS/DDA
FAUM > Rodger S. Gabrielson

Office of Legislative Counsel’

SUBJECT : HSCA Records

1. During the course of the.HSCA investigations, much classified
‘ information was assembled in response to HSCA requests. Three categories
of, information must» new be disposed of uncer terns of the HSCA/DCI ©
i#@morandum of Understanding.

Category la: Classified material from Agency
holdings, requested by the HSCA, which HSCA staff
members reviewed.

Category 1b: Classified material from Agency
holdings, requested by the HSCA, but which HSCA
staff members did not review.

Category 2: Material generated by the HSCA from
‘ Agency classified holdings made available to. the
HSCA in response to the latter's request. (Note:
This HSCA material is considered by the HSCA as its
property and, therefore, not releasable to the
public under the Freedom of Information Act. An
inventory of this material received from HSCA has
— xe been completed. )

Category 3: Classifigd correspondence and certain
unclassified correspondence exchanged between this
Agency and the H5CA.

2. The HSCA has indicated its desire that copies of these three
aategories of material ve hald in sealed and segregated storage ta
ensure the preservation cf all relevant records pertaining to tne
vnase of the investigatiun involving this Agency. In order to accom-
modate the HSCA, but also leave our own records accessible for routine
:urposes, a photographic copy should be made of each official Agency
document made availabie in response to a specific request by the HSCA
(Category la and 1b).

z+


14-0000

a a

3. Uron completion of the task of photographing the Category la
: and 1b docuents, those photoeraynic copies (Catevory 1}, cme HSCA-
generated materials based upon Agency material (Category 2), and the
Gesignated Agency-HSCA correspandence {Category 3), will be sealed and
held in segrecated storage by the Agency, in accordance with schedules
Segestablished by the Archivist of the United States.

4. vocuments are now in the individual custodies of sembers of
the Agency SCA Task Force. These individuals’ are listed by attachment.

5. Please advise on your recommended procedures for photographing
these documents and procedures for entering these copies into sealed

storage.
| ‘ - /
. Rodger S. Gabrielson
Attachment
i FF .
oe
F = +t

“xy —

14-0000

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN THE DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE
AND THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON ASSASSINATIONS

Fy

BA hvaysy (AR ET

I, Preparation of Materials

ay A. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) will cooperate fully
B in the investigations conducted by the Select Committee on Assassinations
_ (Committee) by providing access, as requested, to classified information
within the releasing authority of the CIA, and held by the CIA, that bears
upon the study and investigation authorized by H. Res. 222. CIA will
notify the Committee of any requested information held by CLA not

within the releasing authority of the CIA, and notify the Committee of the
proper authority to contact to obtain the ‘information. No document ora
portion of the document in the possession of CIA will be withheld without
written notice of that action to the Committee. Access to all classified
information designated for protection from unauthorized disclosure by the
Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) and currently held by any federal
agency or department shall be governed by this mem@fandum,

Mal B. Documentary material will be made available as expeditiously

and completely as feasible, subject to the responsibility of the DCI to
protect sensitive intelligence sources and methods. The Committee and
CIA will periodically agree upon a list of identities that will not be excised
from materials turned over to the Committee. Subject to the list of
identities that will not be deleted, CIA will appropriately sanitize, including
excising if necessary, information to assure protection of information
identifying sensitive sources and methods, When an excision is made,

CIA will indicate the nature of the source or method excised, including the
functional intelligence discipline which was the source of the intelligence.

. C. The Chief Counsel of the Select Committee on Assassinations
and a designated representative of the DCI shall meet monthly to discuss
a random sample of the complete and unsanitized materials selected by
the Chief Counsel for the purpose of verifying the appropriateness of the
sanitizing done by the CLA. Those matters on which they do not agree
shall be referred to the Chairman, Ranking Minority Member, and the
DCI for resolution.

14-0000

awa.
Al .

i Btn 1 ta 2 ur

"1

Iv. Transcripts of Statements Under Oath — bt

'
of

D. In making any excisions or other alterations of requested
‘Materials, CLA shall be bound by 18 U. S. C. Subsection 1505 and all

' other applicable statutes.

{l, Request Pr ocedure

A. The CIA element responsible for dealing with the Committee
is the Coordination and Review Staff of the Office of Legislative Counsel
(C&RS/OLC). All Committee requests for information will be conveyed
to CIA only via the Coordination and Review Staff. Absent extraordinary
circumstances, appointments with CLA employees and former employees
will be arranged through the Coordination and Review Staff. .

B. Al Committee requests for information will be in writing.

In the interest of timely response, C&RS/OLC will accept preliminary

telephone or other oral requests, but no information can be made

‘available until a request is received in writing from the Chief

Counsel or one of the Deputy Chief Counsels.
Ill, Staff Clearance ;

, Prior to access by Comunittee personnel to any material which ~
has been designated for protection from unauthorized disclosure by the
DCI, such Committee personnel will be granted security clearance ~-

by the Committee after consultation with the CIA. Committee personnel
requirin access to such material will be required to execute, in advance,
the attached Select Committee on Assassinations Nondisclosure Agreement.

74,

A steno-typist from either the Committee or the CIA will make a
verbatim record of all statements of current CIA personnel taken under

oath. One copy of the record will be made available to the Committee
and the other to the CIA in accordance with the Rules of the Committee.

V.. Examination of Material

. Materials to which access has been granted by CIA will be reviewed
in a CIA reading room set aside for this purpose or ina designated area

“within the Committee's offices.

. VI. Storage of Materials

A, Committee procedures for control and storage of any documents
or materials provided by the CLA which require protection will follow
security standards and procedures established in consultation with, and
approved by, the CIA. ; . ;

LO we en er nce on

14-0000

ye.

SAAT

sks

wy
oe

eke ( _ C

B. - Upon the termination of the Committee, all materials

_ provided by CLA and examined by the Committee will be kept and

preserved within a segregated and secure area within CIA for

at least 30 years unless the DCI and the House of Representatives |
agree to a shorter period of time. All persons having access to such
materials must sign an access sheet indicating the date, the name of the
person receiving access, the specific documents or materials to which
access was granted, and the person who authorized the access. ae

VII. Disclosure of Information ,

A. The Committee will notify the DCI in writing of its desire to
disclose, in any manner, including under the Select Committee on
Assassinations Nondisclosure Agreement, any information that is
designated for protection from unauthorized disclosure by the DCI.

Uf within five days the Committee does not receive a letter from the
DCI objecting to the proposed disclosure and stating the reasons for the
objection, the Committee may disclose the information. ;

B. If the DCI notifies the Committee within five days that he objects

“. to the proposed disclosure and states the reasons for his objections,

"

| ven

the Chairman of the Committee and the DCI, or their designated

representatives, shall.meet to attempt to resolve any differences over the

information to be disclosed. If the Chairman of the Committee considers
that the negotiations have reached an impasse, he will give the DCla
written notice to that effect, and the Committee will take no steps until
at least 14 days thereafter to disclose the information in dispute..

‘C, Any differences left unresolved by negotiatiol’ may become the
subject of litigation. .In any such action each party wid be free to assert
all its constitutional, statutory, or other legal rights, and the parties
agree to be bound by the final outcome of any such action. If such an
action is commenced by the Executive Branch but is disposed of without
a judicial decision on the merits of the disclosure issue, the Committee
agrees that it will not on that basis, or on the basis of its 14-day notice
letter, disclose the information in dispute. This Agreement, however,
is without prejudice to any of the Committee's other rights, privileges
and responsibilities concerning the production by legal compulsion and
disclosure of information, and the DCI's rights, privileges and responsi-~
bilities concerning the protection from disclosure of the information.

Va

; POE Le pec

Director of Cent al Intelligence

19 ave 1977
Date

August 29, 1977’
Date ;


14-0000

S August 1996

CIA's HSCA JFK SEQUESTERED RECORDS - I

mE

BOXES 1-63 HARDCOPY MATERIAL

The 63 boxes contain copies of material collected or
prepared in response to over a thousand individual requests
from HSCA. Boxes are grouped by responsible component. With
the exception of the security files, there is no general
subject grouping or order to the boxes. Individual boxes
usually contain a mix of topics and types of documents, and
there is much duplication through out the collection. —

Boxes 1-34 (Directorate of Operations): contains a mix of
CIA, third agency (primarily FBI) and Warren Commission
documents plus a significant amount of HSCA originated
material*. These records cover a wide range of topics
but focus on anti-Cuba/Castro activities and Oswald
in USSR, Mexico City and New Orleans. Also included are
responses to the large number of names traces
requested by the HSCA staff, numerous copies of
documents from the Oswald 201, the 1967 IG report,
testimony of Richard Helms before HSCA, Nosenko
material, CIA cable traffic.

Boxes 35-36 (Inspector General): HSCA reports, Senate
Select Committee reports, reports on Cuban
‘operations, Book V of Church Committee final report.

Boxes 37-38 (Office of the General Counsel): Cuban exile
activities, Garrison investigation, name files.

Bok F 39 (Directorate of Science & Technology): Photo
comparisons of Hunt, Sturgis and the Dallas tramps;
chart of frames from Zapruder film.

Boxes 40-48 (Office of Security): name files.

Boxes 49-63 (Office of Legislative Liaison): HSCA
requests, notes, memos, correspondence and final
report, plots against Castro, photos of unknown man,
defector study, Nosenko, name files, Mexico City - .
station files, FBI reports, Warren Commission reports.

*Zppproximately 30,000 pages of HSCA originated material has
been removed=from the files and transferred to the National
Archives. . —

S August 1996

CIA's HSCA JFK SEQUESTERED RECORDS -- II

=F

BOX 64 MICROFILMED MATERIAL

Box 64 contains 72 reels of microfilm. All but a small
percentage of the materials are CIA-originated, and include
cables, dispatches, memoranda, reports, and correspondence.
Many of the reels contain a mix of subjects and types of

material:
Reels 1-20

Reels 21-22
Reels 23-25
Reels 25-28

Reels 28-30
Reels 31-44

Reels 45-47

Reels 48-49
Repeks 50-56
Reels 57-60

Reels 61-62

Reels 62-71

Reel 71-72

rt

Project Files

Individual 201 files, mainly Cubans, some
Americans and Soviets

Cuban Defector AMMUG-1
DO Project Files, Garrison investigation
Cuban exile organizations

Office of Personnel Files; Mexico City
records

Oswald files; 201 file is duplicate of
hardcopy file

Nosenko; Mexico City records

CIA-HSCA Correspondence, 1967 IG Report,
Cuban Mug Book, miscellaneous

Individual 201 Files (includes Cubela)
Office of PersGnnel Files
Nosenko, Golitsyn, anti-Castro activities

Cuban Revolutionary Council and other Cuban
exile organizations.

14-0000

Outline of Presentation to the Board
August 6, 1996

( Lo ow
pf. Mi eS e areriir »)

Where we are in the process of CIA records

We have almost completed the Oswald 201 file.
Size 17 boxes
Postponements have been reviewed word by word

We are now tuming to new areas for CIA records
. HSCA collection now housed physically just a few yards from here
To be reviewed word by word —
Scelso
Oswald in Mexico City by Hardaway and Lopez
JFK Library
Release this fall of many records related to Cuba

| am pleased to say — and I offer this as my personal opinion — that | have
seen no example where the Board has postponed any information that
bears directly on the assassination. | believe that the story is coming out
with the records that are being released.

Issue immediately before us is the CIA’s sequestered collection.
Mr. Pereira has described it from the perspective of the agency.

The Review Board staff has been reviewing the record and has given the
Board its own assessment of the status of the records.

There are a great number of records in the sequestered collection that are highly
relevant:

Lee Harvey Oswald
Georges de Mohrenschildt
Elena Garro de Paz
Antonio de Varona (Frente RD)
Silvia Duran

Rolando Cubela

CRC

Bay of Pigs

Gastro assassination attempts
Warren Commission

HSCA

Garrison investigation

er

14-0000

-2-

These types of records need to be reviewed on the same word-to-word basis as
the board has reviewed records thus far.

But we have a new problem: how should the Board review records from the
sequestered collections where the relevance to the assassination is not clear.

Examples where the staff has difficulty finding a nexus to the
assassination in certain records.

| will offer a few examples to provide you with a flavor of some of the issues we
are confronting. The examples below are hypothetical and are loosely based
upon our review of the files in order to illustrate the issues.

A. The “false hit” category

The HSCA requested files from CIA on a great number of persons. Inmany ~
instances the agency did not know why the files were requested, and accordingly
it made available files that it had on the name that had been requested.

Because names are not always unique, the agency sometimes made available
files on individuals who were of no interest to the HSCA and who had no
identifiable relation to the assassination.

_ 1. Avery common name --- | will use as an example the name Robert Smith.

The HSCA requested Robert Smith files because of an alleged
connection between a “Robert Smith” and Lee Harvey Oswald in 1963.
The Smith whose file was made available, however, was a CIA officer who
died in 1956. The ARRB staff has reviewed the file and has discovered
no relevance to the assassination.

B. CIA operational files or 201 files.

2. Cuban now living in the Unite’ States. CIA unsuccessfully attempted to
recruit her to collect information on Cuba through her family and friends,
but ultimately abandoned the effort. Neither she nor any of her hoped for
contacts had any identifiable connection to the Oswald story or to the JFK
assassination.

3. Cuban cultivated for operational work against Castro i in whom CIA lost|

~ interest when he was not able to meet operation standards. -

4. - Soviet official at the Mexico City embassy during Oswald's visit, although
he never had any personal contact with him. The Mexico City portion of
his file ha been reviewed and released in part to NARA. The remainder of

14-0000

~3-

his file covers his subsequent career in a European country, where CIA
monitored him closely. This portion of his career - by far the largest part
of his file - has no bearing on Oswald or the JFK assassination. -

C. CIA officials

There are many personnel files of CIA officers. The files often contain medical
records evaluations, recommendations, and postings. They generally do not
contain any operational details.

5. CIA employee who was a Headquarters secretary for a major figure in the
case. Her file consists of personnel records, medical records, and a
polygraph, none of which has any identifiable bearing on the Oswald story
of the JFK assassination.

As anyone knowledgeable about the Kennedy assassination can testify, there is
a bewildering number of allegations regarding CIA officials who have alleged
connections to the assassination. The HSCA investigated some of these leads.
Not all leads are successful.

6. ACIA officer was allegedly in Dallas on November 22. An examination of
the file suggests that the individual was not in Dallas, but was in Vietnam.
There is nothing in the file that contains any apparent connection to the
assassination.

7. CIA official in Mexico City who was directly involved in matters related to
Oswald's visit. Prior to and subsequent to the Mexico City tour, the officer
was stationed at headquarters and at other locations in the world. With
the exception of the portion related to Mexico City, the staff can identify no
other documents that illuminate the assassination.

D. Summary of problems an

First, establishing criteria for relevance
Second, handling different types of records
ex. 1: entire file has no identifiable relevance

ex. 2 some 3 documents i in a file have relevance, but others do not

ex. 3: portion of a document has identifiable relevance, but others do not

14-0000

-4-

Selected Statutory Provisions in The President John F. Kennedy
Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992, 44 U.S.C. § 2107 (Supp. Vv
1994)

Definition of Assassination Record

“Assassination record’ means a record that is related to the assassination
of President John F. Kennedy, that was created or made available for use
by, obtained by, or otherwise came into the possession of [the HSCA].”
Sect. 3(2).

Interpretation 1: All records in segregated collection are assassination records.

Argument: the segregated collection are “assassination records” because
a government agency examined them in the course of their investigation
of the assassination.

Interpretation 2: Only segregated collection records that actually relate to the
assassination of President Kennedy come within the scope of the JFK Act.

Argument: In order for a record to be an “assassination record” it must:
(a) relate to the assassination of President Kennedy, and (b) have been
used by, obtained by, or otherwise came into the possession of a_
government agency.

Selected CFR Provisions:

“All records collected by or segregated by ail Federal, state, and local
government agencies in conjunction with any investigation or analysis of
or inquiry into the assassination of President Kennedy... .” 36 CFR
1400. 1(b)(2)

“An assassination record shall be released i in its entirety except for
portions specifically postponed pursuant to the grounds for postponement
of public disclosure of records established in . . . the JFK Act, and no
portion of any assassination record shall be withheld from public
disclosure solely on grounds of non-relevance unless, in the Review
Board's sole discretion, release of part of a record is sufficient to comply
with the intent and Purposes of the JFK Act.” 36 CFR 1400.5. - ;

14-0000

-5-

V. Staff Preliminary Suggestions to Board
A. Factors suggesting possible relevance to assassination:

Unfortunately, there is no simple, clear, obvious method for determining
relevance. Accordingly, rule of thumb guidelines need to be followed.
The obvious rules of thumb to assist staff in identifying relevant
documents would include:

-- documents that obviously are related to assassination
CIA internal investigations
Oswald records
Garrison investigation
Castro assassination attempts

- documents falling within certain dates (relevance of dates depends on
issue under consideration
dates associated with Oswald
dates immediately around assassination
dates of Warren Commission
dates of Church Committee, HSCA investigations

-- individuals of importance
CIA officials in Mexico City
David Atlee Phillips
Win Scott
CIA officials in HQ involved in investigation
John Scelso
JJ Angleton

-- geographical relevance (USSR; Cuba; Mexico)
B. Handling of records in sequestered collection
First, ARRB staff reviews all records and files in sequestered collection.

Second, all documents that are found to be relevant will be subjected to
word by word review of postponements by the Board. The staff will, over
time, work with the Board to establish guiding criteria for identifying
relevance. The focus will be on individuals and groups that have been
identified as playing a role in the larger story of the assassination.
Examples of individuals who have been identified as being a part of the
greater story surrounding the assassination include David Atlee Phillips,
Win Scott, James Angleton, etc. Groups include Cuban exile groups

14-0000

-6-

(DRE, Alpha 66, etc.), Minutemen, etc.

Third, for a file where no relevance can be found, the staff will write a
memorandum identifying the file, describing the review process, and
explaining the basis of finding no relevance. The staff memorandum will
then be sent to the JFK Collection and be made fully available to the
public.

Fourth, for a file containing some relevant records, the relevant records
will be subjected to the word by word review. Records for which the staff
has been able to identify no relevance, a memorandum will be written to
describe generally the type of records and explain the basis for finding no
relevance.

Fifth, with regard to the microfilm copy of the Oswald 201 file, the staff will
review the entire file in order to determine whether there are any records
in the file that are not included in the released version of the 201 file. If

- such records are identified, they will be subjected to the same word by

word review as other records -- but the remainder of the 201 file will not
be reviewed again.

Sixth, in rare cases, portions of a document that genuinely have no
identifiable relevance to the assassination, may be redacted consistent
with the 1400.5.

| recommend that the Board, in the near future, deliberate on the guidance that it
wishes to give to the staff regarding these matters.

14-0000

discussion with the Review Board.

TESTIMONY BEFORE JFK BOARD, 6 AUGUST 1996 +&~

SON
Introduce CIA participants

We are pleased to provide information to the Assassination
Records Review Board that might assist the Board in fulfilling
its responsibilities under the President John F. Kennedy
Assassination Records Collection Act. CIA is committed to full
cooperation with the Board.

Before addressing the subject of the sequestered collection
directly, I would like to provide some background to help put
the sequestered collection into some sort of context.

In the spring of 1992, prior to the enactment of the JFK
Assassination Records Act, then Director of Central
Intelligence, Bob Gates issued instructions to begin reviewing
for declassification all records related to the assassination.

The CIA History Staff was charged with identifying the
relevant records. Once this was done, the Historical Review
Group took custody of these records and immediately began
reviewing-them for declassification for release to the National
Archives.

Once the Kennedy Assassination Records Act was passed, our
goal became to release as many of the records as possible by the
22 August 1993 deadline established by the Act. Approximately
125,000 pages were transferred to the National Archives by that
date.

3 fr With subsequent releases, CIA has now declassified and
transferred some 227,000 pages of material to the National
Archives. Based on discussions with the Board, we are
continuing to release additional information that had been
redacted earlier.

The remaining records are in various stages of review.
Some require review by other agencies. Some is congressional
material. Final decisions on other records are awaiting

14-0000

THE ASSASSINATION RECORDS

In identifying relevant records, we have followed the
definitions in. the 1992 Act and the related rules which were
pw Fished in the Federal Register.

The Kennedy assassination records in CIA consist of two
major groups of files. One group consists of the documents in
the Lee Harvey Oswald file--sometimes referred to as the “Oswald
201 file”. These consist mainly of documents collected after the
assassination and during the Warren Commission investigation.

There are about 26,000 pages of material in the Oswald
file. All but a handful have been declassified and sent to the
National Archives.

The second group is comprised of the “sequestered
collection”. These are the records that were made available to
the House Select Committee on Assassinations, and which the
Committee asked CIA to hold in safekeeping upon the completion
of the Committee's investigation.

Certain additional records, including 400 excerpts from

minutes of the.Director’s morning meetings, and some working
files, have been added to the overall collection since 1992.

we

rw
ra

14-0000

SEQUESTERED COLLECTION

First of all, every document in the sequestered
ca@l ection is available to the Board for review. The
documents are available in full, without redactions.

The record shows that the sequestered collection
consists of documents compiled in connection with the
investigation of the House Select Committee on
Assassinations (HSCA).

A portion of the documents were created specifically in
response to requests from the HSCA. Other records were
already in existence prior to the creation of the Committee.
Still other documents were created by the Committee itself.
For example, notes of interviews conducted by the
Committee’s staff.

Within the sequestered collection there are two major
categories of records. One category consists of
approximately 129,000 pages of hard copy. The second
category consists of 72 reels of microfilm, or the
-equivalent of 163,000 pages of hard copy.

The reason why the documents were sequestered-is
explained in a Memorandum of Understanding signed by the
Chairman Louis Stokes of the HSCA and DCI Stansfield Turner
in August 1977. The Memorandum provides as follows:

“Upon termination of the Committee, all materials
provided by CIA and examined by the Committee will be kept
and preserved within a segregated and secure area within CIA
for at least 30 years unless the DCI and the House of
Ripresentatives agree to a shorter period of time.”

In April 1979, Robert Blakey, Chief Counsel and Staff
Director of the HSCA visited CIA Headquarters to complete
_the process of designating what materials were to be
sequestered. All the documents made available to the
Committee were included in the sequestered collection.

14-0000

REVIEW AND DECLASSIFICATION OF THE SEQUESTERED FILES

In 1992, CIA wrote to Speaker of the House Thomas Foley
ragr&esting approval to begin declassifying and releasing the
records. In October of that year, Mr. Foley wrote a letter
to the DCI granting CIA the authority to do so. The
Speaker’s decision was made in anticipation of passage of
the Assassination Records Collection Act.

THE HARDCOPY MATERTAL

The hardcopy part of the sequestered collection
includes copies of most of the CIA documents in the Oswald
201 file. Also included are 201 files, personnel files, and
security files on persons who are mentioned in documents
relevant to the assassination, or who figure in one of the
conspiracy theories.

The collection also includes about 30,000 pages of

documents, memos, and notes (many handwritten) that were
created by the Committee staff during their investigation.

we

14-0000

THE MICROFILM PORTION OF THE SEQUESTERED COLLECTION

As I noted earlier, there are approximately 72 reels of
microfilm in the sequestered collection. (Incidentally, we
ha arranged to have all of the microfilm records printed
in hard copy.)

The decision to microfilm a portion of the sequestered
collection was apparently based on two major considerations:

First, the integrity of the sequestered records
had to be maintained.

Second, a number of the files requested by the
HSCA were active and had to be available to allow people to
continue conducting their normal activities.

The solution was to replace certain records with
microfilm versions. These records were microfilmed during
1979-80 with the approval of the Assassinations Committee.

THE CONTENT OF THE MICROFILM
:) .

A sizeable portion of the microfilm--approximately 50
percent--duplicates the hard.copy-files.. For example,-there
are 12 reels of material from the Oswald 201 file.

The bulk of the reels consists of files on
individuals and organizations, including personnel files of
CIA employees. There are also a number of files on anti-
Castro organizations. All but a small percentage of the
materials are CIA-originated cables, dispatches, memoranda,
reports, and correspondence.

> id .
There are questions of privacy that we believe the
Board may want to consider in-determining what information
is to be released to the public. Some of the records
contain, for example, medical information on an individual.

There are also questions of relevancy that we suggest
the Board consider. For example, many of the documents
cover sensitive activities that go far beyond the timeframe
of the assassination or investigations into the
assassination. . - ote soe See

14-0000

SUMMARY

~-We hope that the Board has found this discussion of
the sequestered documents useful.

=F

--We look forward to continuing cooperation with the
Board as we all work towards releasing as much information
as possible to the American public.

oP

= +t

14-0000

ADMINISTRATIVE - INTERNAL USE ONLY

24 February 1997

MEMORANDUM FOR: Richard Flynn/@ DI
Teresa Wilcox! @ DST

Kathryn Dyer

FROM: J. Barry Harrelson
CSI/HRG, JFK Project Officer
SUBJECT: Records Briefing for ARRB Staff
REFERENCE: ARRB letter to DCI, dtd. 27 November, 1997, RE CIA Compliance

with the JFK Assassination Records Collection Act.

1. The JFK Board (ARRB) staff has requested briefings by records “specialists” on the
Agency's records systems as part of the compliance with the JFK Act process (see reference). The
first DO briefing took place on 12 February. The DA briefing and a follow-up DO briefing is planned for
early March. | would like to set up the remaining briefings as soon as possible.

2. The ARRB staffers are very familiar with agency documents and have had several general
briefings on Agency records; one member of the staff is a former Agency employee (CTC). These
“compliance” briefings should focus on what files would have existed in the 1958-63 time period and
how we search, or account for, those records today. The ARRB requests you have been working on
give you some sense of the type of information they are interested in. In addition | am faxing a copy of
the “talking points" prepared for the DO briefing. | have also ask Jeremy Gunn, ARRB General Counsel,
to provide a list of directorate specific topics.

‘3. The briefing can take place at HQ or at IP. The ARRB attendees will include Mr. Gunn and 4
or 5 members of the Board's CIA team; all are fully cleared (SCI). | have asked Mr. Gunn to provide a
list of dates when he and his staff would be available. | will forward the list to you as soon as | receive
it. Thank you for your assistance in setting up these briefings. If you have any questions, please give
me a call on extension 31825.

ce: John Pereira -

ADMINISTRATIVE - INTERNAL USE ONLY

14-0000

ADMINISTRATIVE - INTERNAL USE ONLY

24 February 1997
MEMORANDUM FOR: Lee Strickland @ DA
DA Focal Point for JFK Board
FROM: J. Barry Harrelson
CSI/HRG, JFK Project Officer
SUBJECT: Records Briefing for ARRB Staff
REFERENCE: . 1. Meeting with you, 21 February, 1997, same subject;

2. ARRB letter to DCI, dtd 27 November 27, 1997, RE CIA Compliance
with the JFK Assassination Records Collection ACT.

1. As we discussed in our meeting of 21 February, the ARRB staff has asked for briefings on
the Agency's records systems. These briefings are the first steps in the compliance with the JFK ACT
process describe in reference #2. At the meeting we set the first two weeks in March as the timeframe
for the DA briefing. Mr. Gunn has requested that the briefing take place prior to 12 March if possible.
The Board is meeting on the 13-14 March and he will be reporting on the status of the compliance
process. Let me know as soon as possible if this is feasible.

2. Your proposal to include representatives of offices of Security and Personnel is excellent.
The briefing should focus on what records would have existed in 1963 and how we search, or account
for, those records today. The talking points paper for the DO briefing, which I left with you, will give you
a good sense of the type of information the ARRB staff is interested in. If you have any questions, please
give me acall on extension 31825.

cc: Becky L. Rant @ DA
John Pereira

ADMINISTRATIVE - INTERNAL USE ONLY

14-00000

a“

ey,

a
ys

1 eve, Gunn

~  * Céha
* bee Phe hoy

Talking Points - 2/18/98 Judge John R. Tunheim, Chair . Thr Po

Assassination Records Review Board Wok. Oh, t
1. OIM - New Office - awry Ng oN,

a. Bringing all of release programs into alignment.

b. Realize there are problems - let me read two short
sections from a briefing I have prepared for the DDA and the
EXDIR

Pgs 13, and 19

c. This office is not knee-jerk or Neanderthal in its
approach. We care a great deal about what makes sense
practically and legally

d. In fact we have a significant legal bent in this
office.

Lee is a former OGC attorney.
His FOIA coordinator is an attorney.

I am a former DGC on rotation from OGC
And I have three attorneys assigned to this office
Bruce Burke - Assoc DGC for Information

And two staff level attorneys:
{ Vicky Pepper/a GS-15 attorney and

Martin Boland a junior attorney.

2. Cover Issue:

a. Appreciate your consideration of our concerns on

(state_covery.

b. As I explained when I met with Dr. Gunn on 3
February. There are subjects that seem like open secrets,
if they could be called secrets at all. And certainly, this
is different from a secret like x is a CIA spy in y country.

c. But as the State Department and our station chiefs
have indicated, this is more important that it would seem at
first blush. There are repercussions from official
acknowledgment of certain ~~open secrets.'!

d. Which brings me to perhaps a final point:

14.90000

_

a

a

e. Intelligence information often looks sensitive to
the layman or generalist when the expert will tell you it is
innocuous. And conversely, what seems innocuous to the
layman can be quite sensitive. Our job is to help you
distinguish the one from the other.

£. we rely on you to help us figure out ways to ensure
your job is done and the American people are informed
without doing damage to intelligence equities.

g. We want to be as forward leaning as possible, and
work out compromises so it is a win-win solution for our
respective organizations and for the American people.

h. We will strive very hard for a cooperative,
harmonious relationship and we are committed to providing
whatever resources are needed, from a very slender resource
base to ensuring that we have met all of your taskings.

{shifted 7 additional contractor/reviewers to bring the
total to 20]

14-0000

Olfice of
a

of MiVi Challenges
Matin Manage™

[apainistrative internat use ontY](__ If JC IL IJLILIUU0I
& Process

~ Directorate Search & Review Is Cumbersome

~ Coordination Is Resource Intensive & Inefficient

 IRO Task Not Perceived As Important

a --Limits Experience & Sophistication We Can
Bring to the Task

~ The IRO Has Little Clout or Resources

& Policies
Saying “No” Is Easier Than Justifying Damage
» Past Practices Are Not Examined Until Forced

sladdais/ed/oriefing/982Gina8.ppt

Process: First, process - the components own the information and the IRO is the gate-
keeper who controls what will be done, what will be searched, and what will be released.
This makes coordination complex, but the larger issue is that the IRO usually does not
have either the clout or the resources to do the job and we find cases bottle-necked.

Policies: What also makes coordination difficult, is an institutional bias to withhold
until forced to release. Thus, we adopt silly positions. When pressed, we often concede
in the end, but we lose credibility in the process.

There is no stomach, and perhaps no time to: ,
& Question the questionable,

& Revalidate the counter intuitive,

& or even overturn the nonsensical.

14-0000

an of

“ng t Mivi. -OIM Corrective Actions

“ormane Manate™

[apmivistrative -mrernat use ost] CJC IC ITIOOU0I
« Expedite Automation Efforts

~ Assure All Released Agency Material
Contained in a Compatible and Easily

Accessible Database
« Conduct a Top Level Review of Current
Classification Policy
Confirm What is Sensitive and What is Not

s/addais/ed/briefing/982Gina8 ppt

Sixth, Capture of Previously Released Information: We are trying to complete the job of
populating a data base of previously declassified and released information.

It is not acceptable that those outside the Agency know better than we do, what we have released.
Our MORI database, once fully populated will allow us to:

Satisfy many requesters from information we already have declassified.
Speed up our declassification by knowing what decisions have already been made.
Increase the consistency of our decisions.

And most importantly, avoid wasting resources and embarrassing ourselves fighting to protect -
what already has been released.

And seventh, Classification Policy: The world is changing.
The overall budget figure was never released, but now it is.

It was forbidden to mention the existence of the NRO; that has changed.

All NRO contractors were under cover; now a two page listing of those contractors has been

published in the media.

We tightly protected all overhead imagery program, but we now are declassifying product.

- from early systems.

On the other hand, we still have policies that are outdated and may no longer make sense - [Farm, -
defectors, psychoanalysis, bios, World War II liaison information.]
A small effort can inject fresh thinking, and can staff'i issues for periodic and systematic validation by
senior management.
This can pay dividends by keeping us from wasting time and resources protecting and defending what
senior managers believe can and should be released.

14-0000

Secret - Working Notes

7

17 August 1998

Talking Points for meeting with ARRB Executive Director,
Laura Denk -- 4:00 p.m., 17 Aug. 1998

Meeting is primary a “Meet and Greet”

Laura will be looking for reaffirming of commitment to
complete the tasks still outstanding and to meet the
deadline for the Final Declaration. She may also bring up
the subject of a “Memo of Understanding” on what is to be
done after the Board goes out of business.

Current Status:
Sequestered Collection

The re-review is virtually complete-- the remaining material
(approximate two boxes) is mostly security files)

[Note: In the review controversial, complicated or Denied
in Full documents were white-banded for later processing; I
currently have a team of 3 reviewers going through the
collection handling these problem documents. A number of
these could lead to potential appeal issues. It will take
2-3 weeks to complete the white band review.]

Russ Holmes' file

Review -- approximately 2/3 completed

Indexing -- approximately 1/2 completed
Special Requests

Complete -- 22

Continuing -- 10 (searches complete;

material being
collected or
available. for review) -
Outstanding -- 5 All DO

(Note: Two of the outstanding requests (CIA 16 and CIA-IR-
04) are long-overdue priorities that the ARRB staff
requested by completed by 7 August. Laura may raise this
issue. Several of the “Continuing” requests are close to
completion. ]

Preparation of Records for NARA
(Board Determination Documents and Release in Fulls)

The pace wili pick as I move reviewers from the sequestered
collection to assisting with preparation.

(Note: Will probably need additional resources in September
to complete the task]

Secret - Working Notes

14.90000

Secret - Working Notes

Post Board Tasks (some examples)

Duplicates from the Sequestered Collection, Russ
Holmes, and other working files.

Referrals received in last two months of project (We
will try to review as many as possible by end of
September)

Other documents/material that it is not feasible to
review by 30 Sept. or extremely time-consuming for
both staffs and marginal to the story (examples:
Mexico City tapes, card files that duplicate
information in the file)

Other Topics for Discussion

Final Declaration -- “Who signs” may come up.

Transfer of Oswald classified files to NARA by 30 Sept.
seanster of all Release In Full documents to NARA by 30
ept. .

[Laura changed procedures -- we no longer have to send
through ARRB staff; send directly to NARA.]

Next Meeting - 25 Aug.- Possible Issues

Mexico City Tapes (200+)

Board leaving toward declaring as Assassination Records;
DO's initial response is to object. I have advised DO that
we will need a “defense” for Aug. 25 meeting.

{EDECANTER

Although the release of DECANTER was delayed at last

“meeting, I understand the Board still leans toward release.

Secret - Working Notes

14.90000

et en

43

Secret - Working Paper

Notes from Briefing of ARRB Staff on Stations?
(11 October 1995 - ARRB conf. roomy

CIA Attendees: Bill McNair
{Lee Carle

¢ John-Goins

Chuck Briggs
Hal Bean
Barry Harrelson

Bill re Stations: ~~

No problem with release of CAS (Controlled American Source),
fact we have overseas locations, CIA representatives in
specific countries -- the problem comes with officially
acknowledging the stations thereby putting the host
government and service ina position of explaining why it is
allowing a foreign espionage unit to operate in the country.
This may become a serious political issue for the
government, especially in countries where the government
does not acknowledge its own service. Also can be perceived
as “rubbing their nose in it” and can affect the trust
between the Agency and the host service (violated agreement
of confidentially).

Maxwell pointed out that this information was 30 years. old
and asked what was the impact of acknowledging a station
presence in 1963 on current operations or relations.

Bill responded “opened up old sores” and cited Rome and the
sensitivity to our involvement in past election. Mentioned
the reaction to the announcement on covert actions by DCI.

Gunn asked if stations = liaison relationship; Bill said the
other service can not say it did not know the CIA was -
operating in its own country -- would look incompetent.

Mary asked about changes in government; Bill responded that
intell types tend to stay own or its revolving door where
the group that leaves when a neww government comes into
power will be back in power at some point. !

Bill comments on specific stations 1
L£ important to the story such as Mexico City and the |
surrounding stations which were involved in the cable ee aie
exchanges re Oswald, then will release. 5

| j
“Don't take it away from us for little or no gain to the /

story”, I. e. if not critical to the story let us Proves

Secret

14-0000

| Madrid - Liaison relationships have been up and down; (PNGed
five officers) can't afford any more flaps
i Rabat - long time relationship w/ head of state; could give
H
|
/

Secret - Working Paper

. He indicated he could live with opening the stations for
| short windows if important to story, but also said it

created a problem about protecting other activities in that

window 1
y

Moscow - opened for Oswald windows

Rome - No, past elections issue and current narcotics
. projects

Delhi - No, counter narcotics projects

| anti-government labor unions an issue (however, would
| not “fall on my sword” for this one

Helsinki and Stockholm -- would go to DCI with request to
appeal (governments currently under fire for cooperation
with US/very sensitive operation under way

Marwell asked about substitute language: Scandinavia,
‘Northern Europe -- Bill responded with Western Europe/ said
southern Europe for Rome, Madrid etc. “ok”

London: do’ not want to acknowledge but could live with
Australia - very sensitive

Berlin - is open in 1955; 1963 (?) Bill may have been having
second thoughts about previous statement “to release”, but I
think it still stands -- there was a discussion of why

| Berlin important to story.

Mary asked about other European stations, Bombay and some
South American stations

Bill did not have specific on other stations but made a
couple of comments

Bonn and Hague - no problem

Brussels - very sensitive to any mention of intelligence
service presence

Would get back to them on other stations

{I promised Bill a list of the Stations]

Secret


14-0000

Secret - Working Paper

Other issues discussed aN

: \

Crypts other than LIs and AMs - there was a discussion re
deleting digraph and letting rest of crypt; everyone seemed
receptive, but no decision. -

Bill mentioned Iranian takeover as good example of damage
caused by release of documents with crypts, file #s, etc.
Gunn ask if there was an internal “damage” study prepared.
Bill said he would check.

Marwell rejected the approach of the Agency having the
opportunity to discuss Board actions before official

notification. If we have evidence, need to present upfront,
not come back with additional evidence after the decision.

The balancing of public interest vs Agency needs came up
several times; Marwell commented that even if a document or
item is not important to the Oswald story, the Agency must
still defend.

Bill stated several timed during the meeting “If important
to the story, we can live with release”. 4

Barry
12 October 1995

Secret

